Halifax +2.6 % MoM

mewbie_2

Do we at least all agree that we are currently in a little bull trap, before the savage declines resume? And there is no reason in the name of sanity to expect a return to the HPI madness any time over the next five years?

Really2

adr0ck wrote: »

very interesting about chickens and quails :beer:

however can someone answer my query

if you take the mean (on the graph) to be the trend line (from Nationwide charts)

then we are at the very final stages of the graph (return to mean)

having gone below the trend line at the begining of the year and now probably crossing over it again (i.e. gone below the mean line and now crossing over it again)

(we seemed to have bypassed the bull trap phase)

thanks to whoever can help a confused graph reader

No that is correct the mean is the only consistant on the graph so you would be correct as trying the graph (picture) to fit by using the mean not peaks:)

That is why the graph (picture) means nothing and does not fit at all

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'll agree with whatever is easier to pacify in all honesty.

??????????????????????

Sorry have lost me there are you trying to make out I am angry or aggressive just because I don't agree with you or the picture?

Really2

mewbie wrote: »

Do we at least all agree that we are currently in a little bull trap, before the savage declines resume? And there is no reason in the name of sanity to expect a return to the HPI madness any time over the next five years?

No just a blip not a bull trap, stabalisation by the end of the year and no 20% falls this year. I am sure we could agree on:)

Graham_Devon

adr0ck wrote: »

very interesting about chickens and quails :beer:

however can someone answer my query

if you take the mean (on the graph) to be the trend line (from Nationwide charts)

then we are at the very final stages of the graph (return to mean)

having gone below the trend line at the begining of the year and now probably crossing over it again (i.e. gone below the mean line and now crossing over it again)

(we seemed to have bypassed the bull trap phase)

thanks to whoever can help a confused graph reader

The graph / chart / picture is not adjusted for a timeframe, let alone inflation.

It really is just an illustration. Easier to call it a graph as it looks like one. People are trying far to hard to attach a load of rules to it, which really the graph / chart / picture / illustration is not, and was not intended to be adjusted for.

Whereas the trend lines on the nationwide are not only adjusted for inflation, but also use an average wage which is highly disputed.

But, just for a little light debate on your subject, the image we show falls UNDER the trend. So far, in real house prices, this has not happened, so it's a little unfair to say we are at the last stage, forgetting that in real house prices, we have not fallen under the trend / inflation line.

To say we were where you are plotting us on the illustration, is to say that we have completely and conviniently missed the undershoot, so you couldn't plot us there, as you haven't followed the graph. To plot us where you have, you'd have to say the graph is wrong, which is fine, but it would be nice to have a sound reason.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

1975-76
1980
1989-90
1992

Or do they not count?

Can I ask, why has this got the bulls so uptight?

Using the Joe graph I can only just about make out 1992 and there were no dramatic falls after that The others if they are there, they are hidden, not like your chart.

mewbie_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The graph / chart / picture is not adjusted for a timeframe, let alone inflation.

The interesting point is that the bulls will grab at any small fact in order to subvert or ignore the true picture. Do any of the bulls actually accept that housing has been a BUBBLE? Or do you honestly think that we will have a little drop, and then back to your perception of normality (being sky high prices supported by Insidetrack, etc. pumping an artificial pyramid... etc.. etc...)?

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

No just a blip not a bull trap, stabalisation by the end of the year and no 20% falls this year. I am sure we could agree on:)

Not sure why just because we don't believe in dramatic falls it suddenly means we are back to manic HPI

adr0ck

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The graph / chart / picture is not adjusted for a timeframe, let alone inflation.

It really is just an illustration. Easier to call it a graph as it looks like one. People are trying far to hard to attach a load of rules to it, which really the graph / chart / picture / illustration is not, and was not intended to be adjusted for.

Whereas the trend lines on the nationwide are not only adjusted for inflation, but also use an average wage which is highly disputed.

But, just for a little light debate on your subject, the image we show falls UNDER the trend. So far, in real house prices, this has not happened, so it's a little unfair to say we are at the last stage, forgetting that in real house prices, we have not fallen under the trend / inflation line.

To say we were where you are plotting us on the illustration, is to say that we have completely and conviniently missed the undershoot, so you couldn't plot us there, as you haven't followed the graph. To plot us where you have, you'd have to say the graph is wrong, which is fine, but it would be nice to have a sound reason.

but according to the Nationwide chart we have undershot (just very slightly)

the graph only shows undershooting at the very end (not in bull trap phase)

so the question is which is right?

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

Using the Joe graph I can only just about make out 1992 and there were no dramatic falls after that

Clever, aint you. Would kind of fall in line as to why I didn't list any bull traps after 1992.